On 6/6/2014 1:11 PM, Bruno Luong wrote:> dpb <none@non.net> wrote in message <lmsth7$ekd$1@speranza.aioe.org>...>> On 6/6/2014 12:03 PM, Bruno Luong wrote:>> >>>> >> Yet another approach somewhat akin to Bruno's...>> >>>> >> >> interp1(a,1:length(a),x,'nearest')>> >> ans =>> >> 3>> >>> > Not completely equivalent, INTERP1 will has the resulting index>> jumps by>> > 1 unit when passing the middle point of the EDGES, whereas HISTC jumps>> > right at the EDGES.>>>> Didn't say it was equivalent; only that it is "_somewhat_ akin to"...>> You should point out the difference, otherwise it can be missleading for> OP.

What's misleading? I pointed out it was an alternative; he didn't specify precisely what solution he wished...you didn't give any explanation of your solution, either or how it differs from FIND.

Seems pretty picky nitting to me...

>> > INTERP1 and HISTC methods can deal with x as vector (not FIND()).>>>> But FIND() returns the specific preceding/following index value>> depending on the usage if that's significant. The vector of lookup>> values is easily dealt with via ARRAYFUN>> IMO ARRAYFUN is a poor choice when speed is important for large array of> x. I often prefer for-loop compared to ARRAYFUN.

Whatever...again OP didn't say anything about array size(s) from which to judge whether speed would be an issue or not...